It's said that he is her favorite because he is a "reunion" child, born after his mother became queen. There is a ten-year gap between Andy and the next older child, Anne. It is said that during that gap time, the marriage of the Queen and the Duke underwent some significant upheaval and their eventual rebonding resulting in Andrew.

A romantic idea, and it may or may not be true....but that's the legend behind "Andy is the fave."

Many books and articles written in the past have claimed that Andrew is her favourite child. I don't know whether that's true or not but it is certainly generally accepted 'fact' by a great many. One royal 'insider', prolific author A.N.Wilson, in his rather dreary book 'The Rise and Fall of the House of Windsor' says:

(Grandmotherhood is evidently a different matter, but she never gave the impression of liking any of her children except Andrew more than she liked her horses and dogs).

I found it interesting that the person favorable commenting on Andrew in the article was Nicholas Soames an admitted friend of Prince Charles. Not an unbiased source.

I also don't buy that Epstein is a changed man. Someone who attacks someone sexually has real issues and I don't believe those people can change. God knows his victims will have to deal with those issues for the rest of their lives.

As for Andrew's behavior I feel like he acts this way because he never has to face in real consequences for his actions. Sure the media will rake him over the coals for it but other than that he can go about his business. I also wonder about the detectives/bodyguards who follow him around? Did they not check the background of the people he interacts with? Did anybody know who this man really was?

I am not sure that the Queen made the right decision. I don't feel that this is an issue that will/should blow over. Andrew should not be friends with people like this. It seems to be that this has been going on for awhile so clearly he must have noticed something. Does anyone know if the government can prevent Andrew from representing British trade or is that purely his choice?

Even if people around Prince Andrew knew the background or history of someone, unless that person was an imminent threat to him personally or to his family, there's isn't much that they can do or say about it. He will do what he wants to do, basically.

Again, I think it's hard to say whether Prince Andrew is representing British interests, or Royal interests. The finances of the royal family are something of a mystery, although we know they have several trust funds. Trust funds and high finance go hand in hand; who is representing what, though, is always hard to say.

If the man who likes the overly young girls is a great financier, Prince Andrew won't be the first rich man who benefits from such a relationship.

But it is unseemly for the Queen to protect her son, if she is, from public opinion consequences.

[QUOTE=PrincessKaimi;1214850] Again, I think it's hard to say whether Prince Andrew is representing British interests, or Royal interests. The finances of the royal family are something of a mystery, although we know they have several trust funds. Trust funds and high finance go hand in hand; who is representing what, though, is always hard to say.[QUOTE=PrincessKaimi;1214850]

The family aligns itself with rich people and popular brands. Burberry has a royal warrant and one of their coats has recently sold out when Kate Middleton wore it. There's advantages to giving people like Richard Branson knighthoods You keep the rich happy and they keep you happy in whatever way they can. Hasn't that always been the way of the monarchy, regardless of nationality? Or he'll ride it out and keep the position because his belief in being bullet proof has been backed up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi

But it is unseemly for the Queen to protect her son, if she is, from public opinion consequences.

A parent will do what they will to protect their children, even when the child has been an absolute ****. We see Andrew as arrogant, is it not possible that the Queen, for all her dedication to her kingdom, feels the same way in such a situation, that no one, outside of their family, has a right to tell them who they can associate with?

There is the alternative, which I think is the more reasonable. Having him step down puts him in the firing line if the FBI starts to question people. She'll tear his head off but not when he's in danger of seriously embarrassing The Firm by being brought in by foreign authorities over such nasty business. I'm sure she's asked him if he did anthing wrong and he said no and they're now waiting for the bomb to go off in someone else's face before he "has an epiphany" and drops out of sight.

I found it interesting that the person favorable commenting on Andrew in the article was Nicholas Soames an admitted friend of Prince Charles. Not an unbiased source.

I also don't buy that Epstein is a changed man. Someone who attacks someone sexually has real issues and I don't believe those people can change. God knows his victims will have to deal with those issues for the rest of their lives.

As for Andrew's behavior I feel like he acts this way because he never has to face in real consequences for his actions. Sure the media will rake him over the coals for it but other than that he can go about his business. I also wonder about the detectives/bodyguards who follow him around? Did they not check the background of the people he interacts with? Did anybody know who this man really was?

I am not sure that the Queen made the right decision. I don't feel that this is an issue that will/should blow over. Andrew should not be friends with people like this. It seems to be that this has been going on for awhile so clearly he must have noticed something. Does anyone know if the government can prevent Andrew from representing British trade or is that purely his choice?

I agree - we have exactly one person's not-unbiased opinion that the Queen is backing Andrew. Has the Queen given any indicators that Andrew is being supported? Not that I have seen.

I don't think, jemagre, that the Queen has made any decision. I genuinely believe that it's going to be a long-term phase-in/phase-out solution. The Queen is unlikely to say "right now Andrew, quit!" I believe strongly that it's more like "Come up with a six month plan that eases you out, gets Sarah out, and makes this fade away."

I think it's far more likely that we will something happen after the Royal wedding. Perhaps in mid-May, Andrew is given some sort of position as Royal representative to the Bliddelty Boopety Council and has to give up his UK Trade Rep slot to accommodate that. And then perhaps in June, that Sarah Ferguson has found a home in Scotland that is near the new location of her combined charity offices in Edinburg and so will be leaving Royal Lodge.

Remember how long the Queen put up with the sniping between Charles and Diana. She has a long tolerance. But even she has limits.

__________________"Me, your Highness? On the whole, I wish I'd stayed in Tunbridge Wells"

What a sick opinion. Public persons come with the full package, incl. "private indiscretions". So, if you are good at your job you can mingle with sexual offenders because you do this in your private life? What a joke and a confession of failure by the british goverment. Now they are coming up with immoral excuses because they cant get rid of a royal who does a "job" that is an official self-service shop for a luxury lifestyle on taxpayers' expense.

We can only hope so, NAP. If the Duke does lose his trade position, it would do him well to move to another position before he's let go from UKTI. It might be good to see him do some visits to HM forces around the world and some unglamorous charity work such as the Princess Royal does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotAPretender

I think it's far more likely that we will something happen after the Royal wedding. Perhaps in mid-May, Andrew is given some sort of position as Royal representative to the Bliddelty Boopety Council and has to give up his UK Trade Rep slot to accommodate that. And then perhaps in June, that Sarah Ferguson has found a home in Scotland that is near the new location of her combined charity offices in Edinburg and so will be leaving Royal Lodge.

It is sad to admit, but I am thoroughly disappointed in Prince Andrew. While his duties as a trade envoy might involve some grey areas, one must consider carefully with whom to associate and how to avoid to be taken advantage of. Prince Andrew has displayed a serious lack of judgement thereby dragging his family into an unpleasant situation.

__________________"I never did mind about the little things"
Amanda, "Point of No Return"

This isn't about the Jeffrey Epstein controversy, exactly, but it seems to have been published now because of the general controversy surrounding Andrew.

News of the World has an article up, by...who else!...Mazher Mahmood, he of Sophie's fake sheik sting and Sarah's cash for access scandal.

The article can't be accessed unless you have a subscription, but I have my ways of getting most of the text anyway. Here it is:

Quote:

As pressure mounts on the UK trade envoy over links with paedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, we can reveal that he misled the world on his ex-wife's cash-for-access scandal. Andrew DENIED knowing a key Miss Fixit in Fergie's bid to clinch £500000. But today we publish a handwritten note from the prince thanking the woman for her "friendship". The News of the World's two vital pieces of evidence above PROVE that the Duke of York dodged telling the truth when quizzed over his alleged involvement in the scandal. We exclusively told last year how his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson tried to broker a deal introducing a businessman - our undercover investigator - to the prince, Britain's Trade Ambassador. Fergie, whose meeting with us was arranged by her long-time friend Azra Scagliarini, claimed Andrew knew about her secret wheeler-dealing and even suggested the £½ million price tag. Days later we asked the Duke of York if he had telephoned Azra to thank her for her help, but he DENIED even knowing her. His denial effectively distanced him from the controversy raging around the world over our video evidence of his ex greedily pocketing a $40000 cash down-payment from our man. But today we can reveal that denial was a porkie. In fact Andrew had known Azra well for at least 10 years. He even sent her an affectionate handwritten thank-you note after receiving a Christmas present. The truth... damned by his own words , Prince Andrew sent this affectionate letter to good family friend Azia Scagliarini in 1999 after she sent him an expensive Christmas present of a Hermes designer necklace

I assume that the actual article has the text of the letter, or even a photo of it.

Basically, it seems Prince Andrew denied knowing Sarah's friend who set her up with Mahmood--but the News of the World has a letter that Andrew sent her. NOTW has probably been sitting on this information the whole time, waiting for an opportune moment to reveal it.

How foolish Andrew and Sarah both are. It seems that Azra was in on the sting (some friend she is!) and gave the News of the World a copy of Andrew's letter.

Sarah denied that Andrew was in on her asking $500,000 for an introduction to him. "Andrew is whiter than white." As for Andrew denying that he knew Sarah's "friend", I wonder whether NOTW has him on tape saying that? Otherwise, it's their word against his.

Sarah denied that Andrew was in on her asking $500,000 for an introduction to him. "Andrew is whiter than white." As for Andrew denying that he knew Sarah's "friend", I wonder whether NOTW has him on tape saying that? Otherwise, it's their word against his.

No......I have more text from the article. The News of the World has an email from Prince Andrew's press secretary that claims Andrew completely denied knowing the woman--but they have a verified handwritten letter from Andrew to Azra, and say he actually knew her fairly well.

Quote:

And last week we revealed how Andrew's name had been raised in legal probes into Epstein's abuse of underage girls. With question marks over the prince's integrity and judgment it yesterday emerged his planned trip to Saudi Arabia to boost defence contracts has been shelved. Buckingham Palace insisted it was due to safety concerns. But news that the fourth-in-line to the throne lied in the wake of our cash-for-access probe heaps further pressure on him. We published our damning exposé on May 23, 2010. Five days later we asked Andrew's press secretary, Dr Ed Perkins, if his boss had rung Azra and expressed gratitude for aiding Fergie through her financial problems. Several hours later, after checking with his private office and Andrew personally, Perkins - a former senior editor with ITN and now the Queen's head of news - sent us a response from Buckingham Palace. The email read: "Having spoken to HRH, we can confirm that he has never met, or heard of an individual by the name of Azra Scagliarini and that no such telephone call took place. “

And more text:

Quote:

The note, in blue ink and confirmed as Andrew's handwriting by an independent expert, read: "Dear Azra, Thank you for your very kind and wonderful Christmas present. It was a great surprise. Your help and friendship are much valued over here. I am, however, not as good as Sarah at keeping in touch - I promise to do better! I hope that 99 brings you all that you desire. Things are happening on mine, and I am feeling confident that 99 will be a better year for me. With many thanks and hopes for all our 99s, Andrew." Scagliarini first became acquainted with Fergie in 1998 and became her personal psychic. A source told the News of the World: "Azra and Andrew had spoken dozens of times over the years. " Sarah would often be calling Azra around the clock, sometimes when she was with Andrew and the children. "Andrew would ask to have a quick word with her He'd always ask how she was doing and seemed interested in her life." Today we also reveal extra details originally excluded from our story last May, in which Sarah insists that she had discussed the deal with Andrew, that he suggested asking £500000 and that he promised to play ball. During the meeting Fergie told our man: "I did ask Andrew about meeting you." Later she claimed: "Andrew said to me, 'Listen, okay you wanna see this guy, you want me to meet this guy, you want me to help this guy, that's fine. I will tell you, Sarah, how you can help this guy.' " Then she added: "As Andrew said, 'If he's going to be kind enough to want to play, then Andrew will play.' " Describing how she hit on her price, Sarah bragged: "Andrew said to me, 'Tell him £500000.' "He knows that he's had to underwrite me up to now because I've got no money. So if you want to meet him in your business, look after me and he'll look after you…you'll get it back tenfold!" While there is no evidence that Andrew was involved, the fact that he lied about knowing go- between Scagliarini, and Fergie's strong assertion that he knew what she was up to, will leave the Duke facing more tough questions.

And I don't know where this quote fits in (I am getting this text from Google News' preview function), but:

Quote:

But that public assertion doesn't square with a conversation she had with a friend last December. Then she told how Andrew was fixing for Epstein to settle a debt for her. The bankrupt duchess claimed: "I just rang him and he said, 'Leave it to me. . . you have to understand, I own you now." This week, in a newspaper interview, she confirmed Andrew's involvement in the Epstein bailout but later performed a spectacular U-turn insisting she dealt directly with the disgraced financier.

I wonder whether NOTW has Sarah on tape saying those things, and does she have proof that Andrew said what he said? I can't think of any situation in which Sarah was known to lie about anything so important, though; and I can't think of a situation in which she made something up out of thin air. I agree that the text of the thank-you letter does sound more "friendly" than just a polite thank-you. Things don't look good any way a person looks at it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmay286

No......I have more text from the article. The News of the World has an email from Prince Andrew's press secretary that claims Andrew completely denied knowing the woman--but they have a verified handwritten letter from Andrew to Azra, and say he actually knew her fairly well.

I forget where I read that if stories about you continue for more than 7 days, as a public figure, you're in trouble. But these stories on Prince Andrew have been coming out for over two weeks, and are making international headlines (and right before the wedding, too). I don't think all the stories are fair, as there seems to be a witch hunt going on right now--every shady person Andrew ever associated with, even if just for his job, gets a full article on their association with Andrew.

However, I think that after this, Andrew is finished as trade ambassador.